Chonnam National University (CNU) students are asked by the university to complete course evaluations at the middle and end of each semester. Many students, however, seem not to be interested in the course evaluations, especially the mid-course evaluation. According to the Registrar’s Office, only 1.1 percent of all students filled out the mid-course evaluation for this spring semester. This statistic shows that most students do not think that the mid-course evaluation is as necessary as the final course evaluation, which must be completed in order to promptly view their final grades. Therefore, some students apparently doubt the effectiveness of the evaluation system and question why they need to participate in the evaluations. The Chonnam Tribune looked into the course evaluation process to examine the course evaluations' effectiveness in enhancing learning quality.

Course Evaluation Process
The university introduced course evaluations in the fall semester of 2006 and currently conducts them twice per semester. The mid-course evaluation includes only subjective questions about the classes, while the final course evaluation consists of multiple-choice questions asking students to provide feedback using a five-point scale. The final course evaluation questions are customizable for each course format, such as lecture, discussion, and online courses. Students can access the course evaluation results through the “Course” category on the CNU portal from the day after the final course evaluation deadline.

Student evaluations are crucial for professors to improve their courses and teaching methods while identifying feedback on students’ learning experiences in their classes. Those are a vital part of professors’ improvement and innovation in their classes. They also influence performance appraisals of faculty members, lecturer appointments, and the selection of outstanding professors. Yet, the university has not taken particular measures to compel faculty members to improve classes based upon student evaluations, according to the registrar’s office. The official in charge of the evaluation program at the office said, “There are no compulsory measures regarding professors who receive low evaluation scores from students. These course evaluation results are used by the Office of Education Innovation. They analyze the results each semester to improve the quality of all the courses at the university.”

Inconvenient Truths about Course Evaluations
Most students, however, tend to consider only the final course evaluation, which allows them to see their grades. Statistics show high rates of completion for the final course evaluation, but the number of participants in the mid-course evaluation is relatively far too low. This difference may arise from a lack of awareness of the mid-course evaluation among students. Students do not consider the mid-course evaluation necessary because it is not mandatory for checking their grades, resulting in lower participation rates. Consequently, students have underestimated the possibility that mid-course evaluations can serve as an important indicator for professors to improve their courses and teaching styles.

Moreover, the university provides course evaluation results each semester through its official portal site, but many students ignore them. They mainly use an application called “Everytime” to check the course evaluation results rather than the official results released by the university. The main reason is that students are unaware of the availability of officially provided course evaluations. Ultimately, students do not consider the university's official course evaluations very helpful. Kim Kyeong-hwa (Senior, Faculty of Business Administration) said, “I had never heard that the university offers course evaluation results, so I use the Everytime application, which lets me see the opinions of students more directly and frankly." Students tend to rely on this application so that they can obtain not only course evaluation scores but also detailed reviews of courses. The university’s official system is, regrettably, not considered a convenient and useful way to share information and student feedback about courses. The university needs to take measures to promote participation in and effective usage of their course evaluation results, particularly through better usage of quantitative feedback.

Course Evaluations Losing Purpose
After the final course evaluation, professors are supposed to submit a Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) report with their syllabi, outlining planned improvements for their next course offerings. However, many professors, including full-time faculty members and lecturers, leave the CQI report sections blank. Fulltime-time faculty members who do not write a CQI report suffer no disadvantages, while part-time lecturers tend to feel obligated to write CQI reports due to the stricter requirements they face in renewing their appointments. In this respect, Park Jung-ryeol (Lecturer, Dept. of Korean Language and Literature), the head of the Korean Irregular Professor Union, said, “The university needs to consider ways to encourage all professors to submit their CQI for their courses regardless of their tenure status.” The distinction between faculty members and lecturers undermines the usefulness of course evaluations by letting faculty members ignore the process.

Meanwhile, many students primarily do course evaluations to see their grades. They who do not complete the final course evaluation are restricted from checking their grades until after the grading deadline. This system leads to final course evaluations being considered just a tool for students to check their grades. Yu Hye-won (Senior, Dept. of Agricultural Biochemistry) said, “This system makes me evaluate the courses while I'm in a hurry to check my grades, without thinking deeply." Most universities use similar processes, linking student evaluations to grade retrieval. It seems to be an inevitable strategy in pursuit of increasing course evaluation participation rates. Therefore, students must be made aware of the significance of the course evaluation process and to remember that their feedback is crucial to the development of teaching and learning. Many professors use the course evaluations to assess and restructure their classes so as to realize the goals of their courses. Students are thus instrumental in improving the quality of these courses.

Towards Excellence in Teaching and Learning
There are some concerns among professors about whether the university system of utilizing course evaluations in their performance appraisals is appropriate. The original purpose of course evaluations is to collect student responses to the courses and turn them into an index for judging professors' teaching abilities, while giving students opportunities to think deeply about their learning experiences. Consequently, it is imperative to consider whether the current course evaluation system can contribute to improving the quality of classes, a fundamental ambition of higher education. Hence, members of the university community, including students, professors, and staff members, need to cultivate a culture that takes course evaluations more seriously. By working together to address these challenges, CNU can strive towards continuous improvement and excellence in teaching and learning.

By Kim Young-ji, Reporter